Last visit was: 15 Jul 2024, 14:08 It is currently 15 Jul 2024, 14:08
Toolkit
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative,

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [53]
Given Kudos: 130
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5264
Own Kudos [?]: 42142 [23]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
General Discussion
RC & DI Moderator
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Status:Math and DI Expert
Posts: 11473
Own Kudos [?]: 34343 [1]
Given Kudos: 322
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [2]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
chetan2u wrote:
Hi {b]mikemcgarry[/b],

If I were to get this Q, I would first eliminate Unidiomatic -- "Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism "..
It may be OK to say- he had a dog.
He had a wish ... still be OK

But here the interpretation is HIS own and he is not keeping someone's else interpretation, so the CORRECT construction should use POSSESIVE- Zhuangzi's..

Using this to eliminate, we can home down to B, D and E..

1)Now in this three, E can be straightway eliminated for awkward structure-more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary Zhuangzi- as it clearly does not parallel-Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism. AND ofcourse the second part is missing on 'DID'
2)B requires HAVE in second part rather than DO THIS -- for parallelism..

Having said that and agreeing we do use -- he had ___.. would not POSSESIVE form be better.

Dear chetan2u,
My friend, expressing yourself in all bold, like expressing yourself in all caps, is considered rude in some circles. It is considered the equivalent of yelling and screaming incourteously, which may not be your intent.

FWIW, the structure "to have an interpretation" is not idiomatically incorrect. It is a bit long-winded and indirect, so it may be viewed as rhetorically problematic, especially in this sentence, but certainly there would be sentences in which it would be correct. For example:
"Early twentieth century conductors had an interpretation of Bach's music that sounds ponderous today."

Just because something is intrinsically mine doesn't automatically mean that the possessive is the only way to express it and that the verb "to have" is inappropriate. it is very natural to say
someone has a temper
someone has an attitude
someone has aches and pains
someone has an illness
someone has strange ideas about something
someone has a profound sense of faith
someone has strong emotions
someone has a deep sensitivity

etc. etc.

Does this make sense?
Mike
RC & DI Moderator
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Status:Math and DI Expert
Posts: 11473
Own Kudos [?]: 34343 [0]
Given Kudos: 322
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
chetan2u wrote:
Hi {b]mikemcgarry[/b],

If I were to get this Q, I would first eliminate Unidiomatic -- "Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism "..
It may be OK to say- he had a dog.
He had a wish ... still be OK

But here the interpretation is HIS own and he is not keeping someone's else interpretation, so the CORRECT construction should use POSSESIVE- Zhuangzi's..

Using this to eliminate, we can home down to B, D and E..

1)Now in this three, E can be straightway eliminated for awkward structure-more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary Zhuangzi- as it clearly does not parallel-Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism. AND ofcourse the second part is missing on 'DID'
2)B requires HAVE in second part rather than DO THIS -- for parallelism..

Having said that and agreeing we do use -- he had ___.. would not POSSESIVE form be better.

Dear chetan2u,
My friend, expressing yourself in all bold, like expressing yourself in all caps, is considered rude in some circles. It is considered the equivalent of yelling and screaming incourteously, which may not be your intent.

FWIW, the structure "to have an interpretation" is not idiomatically incorrect. It is a bit long-winded and indirect, so it may be viewed as rhetorically problematic, especially in this sentence, but certainly there would be sentences in which it would be correct. For example:
"Early twentieth century conductors had an interpretation of Bach's music that sounds ponderous today."

Just because something is intrinsically mine doesn't automatically mean that the possessive is the only way to express it and that the verb "to have" is inappropriate. it is very natural to say
someone has a temper
someone has an attitude
someone has aches and pains
someone has an illness
someone has strange ideas about something
someone has a profound sense of faith
someone has strong emotions
someone has a deep sensitivity

etc. etc.

Does this make sense?
Mike

Hi Mike,
Ofcourse, it is not meant to be rude..
again I was about to write 'rude' in Capital to emphasize on 'rude' that it is not the case, but left it..

It is done atleast by me, to emphasize on 'certain keywords' that should not be missed by someone who is short on time..

Any way, I just wanted to enquire that eliminating 2 choices on this aspect, as I, too, feel it is not exactly Unidiomatic but inferior to possessive form for sure, is Ok or not and were these choices written by you keeping these choices in mind.
Director
Joined: 21 May 2013
Posts: 539
Own Kudos [?]: 231 [0]
Given Kudos: 608
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary.

(A) Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary

(B) Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism had a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization, whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not do this

(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential

(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism

(E) In terms of lasting impact, Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism influenced Chinese civilization more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary Zhuangzi

This is a very complicated comparison SC question, the sort that the GMAT might give you. How does one approach such questions? For three more questions of this sort, as well as the OE for this question, see:
Challenging Comparison Questions on the GMAT

Mike

Hi Mike,

I was able to eliminate ABC-and ended up selecting E. In D, is it correct to say 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. Should it not be his contemporary Mengzi?
Intern
Joined: 29 Jul 2015
Posts: 14
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [1]
Given Kudos: 334
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Ivey '19 (A\$)
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE:Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary.

(A) Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary - "that" is referring to Daoism instead of interpretation - INCORRECT

(B) Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism had a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization, whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not do this - did not do what ? "This" is an avoidable pronoun on GMAT -INCORRECT

(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential - Interpretation is compared to Mengzi -INCORRECT

(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism - CORRECT

(E) In terms of lasting impact, Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism influenced Chinese civilization more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary Zhuangzi - did should come after Zhuangzi - X influenced more than ... Y did/influenced -INCORRECT
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [0]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
KS15 wrote:
Hi Mike,

I was able to eliminate ABC-and ended up selecting E. In D, is it correct to say 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. Should it not be his contemporary Mengzi?

Dear KS15,

My friend, I don't know whether you noticed that (E), in addition to some rhetorical difficulties, creates an illogical comparison. You would have to read the OE and the discussion in the original post to understand this. Follow the link in my original post in this thread.

It is 100% correct to use a non-possessive appositive to modify a noun in the possessive. Thus, "his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation" is perfectly correct. It would be far more long-winded and indirect to say, "the interpretation of his contemporary Mengzi."

Does all this make sense?
Mike
SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2456
Own Kudos [?]: 1369 [0]
Given Kudos: 641
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Schools: Erasmus (II)
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
KS15 wrote:
Hi Mike,

I was able to eliminate ABC-and ended up selecting E. In D, is it correct to say 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. Should it not be his contemporary Mengzi?

Dear KS15,

My friend, I don't know whether you noticed that (E), in addition to some rhetorical difficulties, creates an illogical comparison. You would have to read the OE and the discussion in the original post to understand this. Follow the link in my original post in this thread.

It is 100% correct to use a non-possessive appositive to modify a noun in the possessive. Thus, "his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation" is perfectly correct. It would be far more long-winded and indirect to say, "the interpretation of his contemporary Mengzi."

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Hi Mike,

The article is full of tricky examples.

I have question about the phrase 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. I know that 'his' refer to 'Zhuangzi' but the name itself 'Zhuangzi' is mentioned in possessive form. I mean to use 'his', it should mention Zhuangzi clearly to be a correct reference.

Do I miss something? Can you you help?
Director
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 526
Own Kudos [?]: 525 [0]
Given Kudos: 916
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]

pls, explain.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [2]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
2
Bookmarks
Mo2men wrote:
Hi Mike,

The article is full of tricky examples.

I have question about the phrase 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. I know that 'his' refer to 'Zhuangzi' but the name itself 'Zhuangzi' is mentioned in possessive form. I mean to use 'his', it should mention Zhuangzi clearly to be a correct reference.

Do I miss something? Can you you help?

Dear Mo2men,
Great question, my friend! I am happy to help!

This is a very tricky rule about pronouns and their antecedents. In general, a noun in the possessive cannot be the antecedent of a pronoun, but the exception is that an noun in the possessive can be the antecedent of a possessive pronoun.
e.g. Mozart's piano concerti are performed more frequently than his wind concerti."
That's what's going on with Zhuanghi's name in (D).

Does this make sense?

thangvietnam wrote:

pls, explain.

Dear thangvietnam

My friend, the word "had" appears nowhere in (E). I would suggest that you strive to ask more detailed questions. Explain exactly what your understanding is and why you are confused.

Mike
SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2456
Own Kudos [?]: 1369 [0]
Given Kudos: 641
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Schools: Erasmus (II)
mikemcgarry wrote:
Mo2men wrote:
Hi Mike,

The article is full of tricky examples.

I have question about the phrase 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. I know that 'his' refer to 'Zhuangzi' but the name itself 'Zhuangzi' is mentioned in possessive form. I mean to use 'his', it should mention Zhuangzi clearly to be a correct reference.

Do I miss something? Can you you help?

Dear Mo2men,
Great question, my friend! I am happy to help!

This is a very tricky rule about pronouns and their antecedents. In general, a noun in the possessive cannot be the antecedent of a pronoun, but the exception is that an noun in the possessive can be the antecedent of a possessive pronoun.
e.g. Mozart's piano concerti are performed more frequently than his wind concerti."
That's what's going on with Zhuanghi's name in (D).

Does this make sense?

Thanks a lot.
It does make sense
SVP
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 1696
Own Kudos [?]: 1492 [0]
Given Kudos: 639
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary.

(A) Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary

(B) Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism had a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization, whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not do this

(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential

(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism

(E) In terms of lasting impact, Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism influenced Chinese civilization more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary Zhuangzi

This is a very complicated comparison SC question, the sort that the GMAT might give you. How does one approach such questions? For three more questions of this sort, as well as the OE for this question, see:
Challenging Comparison Questions on the GMAT

Mike

Dear Mike,
first of all thank you for the question.
In option D , doesn't it wrongly imply that Zhuangzi’s contempory = Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
Zhuangzi’s contempory is Mengzi and NOT Mengzi’s interpretation .
What am I missing?
Maybe if Contempory was in the possesive form then it would refer to Mengzi.
Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary 's Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.

Please forgive my limited knowledge,just trying to learn by playing Devils advocate.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [0]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
stne wrote:
Dear Mike,
first of all thank you for the question.
In option D , doesn't it wrongly imply that Zhuangzi’s contempory = Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
Zhuangzi’s contempory is Mengzi and NOT Mengzi’s interpretation .
What am I missing?
Maybe if Contempory was in the possesive form then it would refer to Mengzi.
Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary 's Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.

Please forgive my limited knowledge,just trying to learn by playing Devils advocate.

Dear stne,

I'm happy to respond.

My friend, you ask what you are missing. You are missing the deep understanding of English that comes from a consistent habit of reading. Your conclusion here reflects thinking about grammar in a logical, almost mathematical, way. Language doesn't really work that way: grammar is not mathematical. Language is a living thing, and you have to experience that living thing in a consistent way, every single day. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

This specific feature is a very common feature in ordinary spoken and written English. When a name is preceded by a title or another description, and the name itself is in the possessive, then the words before the name do not have to be changed in any way.
. . . the Vice-President Calhoun's view of slavery . . .
. . . my friend Chris' blog article . . . .
. . . the great hitter Ted Williams' last at-bat . . .

In all cases, the words before the name are understood, unambiguously, to refer to the name itself, despite the fact that the name is in the possessive.

My friend, this is an exceptionally common construction. With all due respect, your question here reveals an extremely logical and analytic view of grammar but relatively inexperience with how language is actually used in the real world, and that is combination that the GMAT SC punishes over and over again. It's so important not to approach the GMAT SC in a "rule-based" way, but with the rich experience of having spent months cultivating a habit of reading.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Posts: 69
Own Kudos [?]: 95 [0]
Given Kudos: 77
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE:Other (Education)
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary.

(B) Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism had a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization, whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not do this

Hi mikemcgarry
I eliminated this option because of this part of the option which states 'whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation'
It would be illogical to say that his contemporary is Zhuangzi's interpretation.

This was my line of reasoning.
Could you tell me if I'm right?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [0]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
sarathgopinath wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry
I eliminated this option because of this part of the option which states 'whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation'
It would be illogical to say that his contemporary is Zhuangzi's interpretation.

This was my line of reasoning.
Could you tell me if I'm right?

Dear sarathgopinath,

My friend, see my post in this thread from yesterday, in which I just discussed this very issue. My friend, part of due diligence involves reading everything in the thread, so you know whether what you want to ask has already been discussed. This is best way to show that respect the time and the energy of the experts on this site.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Posts: 69
Own Kudos [?]: 95 [0]
Given Kudos: 77
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE:Other (Education)
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Hi mikemcgarry

I still have one doubt in option D.
(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.

Why do we need a 'had' in D?

Isn't did better?
I did not have as much money as you did.
I'm sure I'm missing out something here. Please tell me what is that I'm missing.
Thanks again!
Manager
Joined: 30 Apr 2013
Posts: 59
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Is the usage of 'Had' correct in option D? Can someone explain
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28834 [0]
Given Kudos: 130
sarathgopinath wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry

I still have one doubt in option D.
(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.

Why do we need a 'had' in D?

Isn't did better?
I did not have as much money as you did.
I'm sure I'm missing out something here. Please tell me what is that I'm missing.
Thanks again!

santro789 wrote:
Is the usage of 'Had' correct in option D? Can someone explain

Dear sarathgopinath & santro789,

I'm happy to respond.

The short answer is that, yes, the "had" is correct and yes, we need it.

The placement of "had" is a somewhat more sophisticated structure. A more standard placement of the verb is after the subject, but here, it begins the comparative clause for clarity.

What is it making clear? The difference between a subjective comparison and an objective comparison. You see, sarathgopinath, your sentence about the money is not a good example here, because it doesn't capture this ambiguity. Consider the following sentence.
1) I like opera more than Chris.
That's an ambiguous statement, by itself. It could mean either of the following, either of which would be correct:
2) I like opera more than Chris does. (A subjective comparison: Chris is compared to the subject of the sentence.)
3) I like opera more than I like Chris. (An objective comparison: Chris is compared to the object of the sentence.)

Without the word "had," version (D) would have this ambiguity.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Posts: 69
Own Kudos [?]: 95 [0]
Given Kudos: 77
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE:Other (Education)
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Thanks mikemcgarry
That helped!
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
1   2
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6981 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts